Monster.com: do you/your employer subscribe? Let's make a deal.

For the book on degree mills I am working on with Allen Ezell, longtime head of the FBI's DipScam unit, I'd like to do a survey of current fake degree usage in the US.

Two years ago I did this for ABC by subscribing to Monster.com for a month, and 'harvesting' thousands of resumes.

Monster now has very limited usage for short-term subscribers. A two-week ($1,000) subscriber can only view 500 resumes. (The one-month is no longer available.

If someone here has, or works for a company that has a regular annual subscription to Monster.com, I would dearly love to buy or beg half a day of usage, during otherwise unused hours (nights, weekends, etc.).

I'm happy to pay for the privilege and/or to barter books, consultations, Ethiopian artifacts, whatever.

Thank you.

John Bear
[email protected]

PS: Monster now lists nearly 20 million resumes, about double the number of two years ago.

 

I did not like that idea of getting access from "other" companies during unused hours (nights, weekends, etc.).

 

Dirty pool I say..how low can you get for your research, or are you trying to save paying the money? Maybe some yof our site patronising pals or other fall-guys on the site will buy in to your quest?.

Want to get fired from your job, this is worse than a fake diploma.

'Beg, steal or borrower', name of a 70's song?

J.R(ic)

 

One more time John Bear..Dirty pool I say..how low can you get for your research, or are you trying to save paying the money? Maybe some of your site patronising pals or other fall-guys on the site will buy into your quest?.

Want to get fired from your job, is this ethical to your employer? Good grief man this is worse than having a fake diploma.

'Beg, steal or borrower' you say..want some honey to taste?

J.R(ic)

 

Hmmm...situational ethics

Let he among us with no "burned CD's", downloaded MP3's, or pirated software be the first to cast the proverbial stone.

Steven King

 

I guess I don't follow this at all. If I buy a record or cd and a person wants to borrow it they can. If you are suggesting this specific use would violate the user agreement, would you please qoute which part it breaks? Otherwise you are talking out of your hat, so to speak. Many thanks.

 

Maybe I misinterpreted Dr. Bear's intent, but I was under the impression that he wanted to make a deal over the table.

Tony

...and I am seldom wrong.

 

??????????????????????????? Are you baiting the Bearmiester. Did you have a bad evening.

Whether or not this is ethical depends on the Monster.com user agreement and the employers rules regarding access. I am really not familiar with Monster.com. However, your rather blanket statement including insulting those who might help him and insulting Bear himself is rather curious.

Why the overreaction and animosity before the facts are in??

North

 

I sent an email to human resources and simply forwarded John's request. Their response was negative. The stated reason was personnel's perception that it would violate the terms of agreement. I feel that neither I nor John did anything unethical. Also, since I've absolutely no information on the terms of agreement, I have no way of even judginge whether personnel is just being overly cautious or it actually would violate the terms of agreement. If they're just being overly cautious, I couldn't blame them in the least since there's no real reason for them to allow it.

 

You will find that any agreement that corporations have with the likes of a 'Monster.com or purchased IP/Software (as in MPeg/CD noted) is on the basis of single company or internal personnel use and not for third party uses such as lending or letting non subscribers use the service..breach of contract, or did you not get it the first time..its stealing.

You think that Monster has not thought of this..of course, and would love to take it away from you in court.

Now back to my bad evening..NO, never had one of those and I dont bait. John B knew exactly what he was asking when he did his post. You see Bill, its about the site and the dialogue we all share, how else can we keep it up even without Viagra.

J.R(ic)

 

Sorry John Roberts but I have a very difficult time believing you, especially since you admit you're not familar with the Monster.com terms of agreement. My perspective is that you somehow claim to know what is in the contract even though unseen. You also are probably assuming how the Monster.com information would be accessed by Dr. Bear. You make a global assertion that the contract must consider it stealing. I'm also amused by your ridiculous statement that Dr. Bear and/or I are thieves.

Listen Mr. Roberts, I don't steal, not even for myself. I don't even download music off the internet as was mentioned earlier in this thread. I certainly wouldn't steal for someone else, not even as fine an individual as Dr. John Bear. On the other hand, I also try very hard to not be a self-righteous judge when I'm observing the actions of others, especially when my view is likely incomplete and incorrect. Bottom-line, I'm amused by your accusations, as previously mentioned.

 

Bill, I too am amused (not), what are you saying, that people would take a freebe even if it was illegal or unethical, this says it all and you and Bear would gladly take someones Monster subscription if it was offered (this thread) as theirs..right.

If its not stealing (wow, sensitive term I have learned on this site) then what would you call it..I know a free gift or a barter exchange. Not likely, since contracts between two parties that exclude third party use, and when a third party does use the service is called????

quoted by BILL: "I sent an email to human resources and simply forwarded John's request. Their response was negative. The stated reason was personnel's perception that it would violate the terms of agreement"

J.R(ic)

 

Think in terms of investigative journalism. If journalists didn't misuse available resources, we would be reading a lot of bingo reults in the newspapers.

 

Journalism, who was it that said J.B was a journalist? He specifically asked for access to Monster because of the prohibitive cost and would glady do a barter exchange (yeh, I know Journalists do it all the time).

I guess I am thrashing this to death..its about contracts, liabilities and business, not about giving J.B access to the Monster site. If Bill can be the first to get his company, especially the HR, Personnel and probably the Legal department in his company to give conditional access to Monster.com to J.B, then I will be the first to concede. BINGO. so what would you call it..I know, its a nice jesture..right..wrong

J.R(ic)

 

You are continuing your ridiculous accusations? I'm trying to keep an open mind that you're not the close minded judgemental jerk that you are making yourself appear but I admit that it is getting more difficult.

Without being familar with the terms of agreement, I can't say what they are. (Unlike you who apparently claims to magically know that it must be illegal.) For example, the terms might say that resumes cannot be taken off of Monster.com and then distributed to other businesses. Without reading those terms please explain how you can KNOW that it would be stealing for someone with legal access to do a search for a few degree mill names and then provide John Bear with a summary report? Please explain how you can know, Mr. Roberts, that John Bear or I were planning to do something unethical. You cannot know. You even admitted that you don't know the details of the terms, yet you continue with your ridiculous accusations!

 

Thinking about it a little more.

John Roberts is also apparently claiming to KNOW what was in my mind and John Bear's mind. He is accussing us of knowing that it would be illegal to do this. Well I can categorically state that he is wrong about my beliefs. I seriously doubt that the Monster.com contract would completely rule out any possibility of John Bear getting this information from a subscriber to Monster.com.

 

Bill, your right this is getting rediculous for an open minded person, and I quote; quoted by BILL: "I sent an email to human resources and simply forwarded John's request. Their response was negative. The stated reason was personnel's perception that it would violate the terms of agreement"

Terms of the agreement...........get it. to give access to a file or contract to which someone is not a party to.

Now tell me (what was it you called me) why you think access to Monster.com should be given to Bear?


Bill it was you that started the Personnel at your company statement then followed with; quote "Without being familar with the terms of agreement, I can't say what they are. (Unlike you who apparently claims to magically know that it must be illegal.) For example, the terms might say that resumes cannot be taken off of Monster.com and then distributed to other businesses.

Go find out, the onus is on you to divy up on the Monster contract at your place of work, that is if they will let you read it..go prove me wrong, give J.B the access, and as I said in my last post..I will concede if your correct.

My only statement, that is if I remember that far back..was the legality of giving access to non authorised subscribers outside of this contract which I know absolutely nothing about (but you do), and J.B trying to save money on access. Maybe we should start a fund called the J.B Monster access fund?

If your personnel dept at your place gives J.B access, I shall contact Monster and advise them of their loop-hole.

J.R(ic)

 

J.R.

I am not sure what the issue is here, but I know it isn't the user agreement with Monster.com. You may want to examine your reactions and the reason for them. Thanks.

 

J.R., it seems a little premature to accuse someone of an ethical lapse for violating a document you haven't read. Presumably Monster.com would have allowances for independent contractors working with a company on a freelance basis; the issue of how to keep things kosher within that framework is most appropriately left to the company and the contractor in question. Assuming that John (or, as you call him, "Bear") will go for the least legal option available is uncharitable.


Cheers,

 

Its been 3 days since John made his request to quote: "If someone here has, or works for a company that has a regular annual subscription to Monster.com, I would dearly love to buy or beg half a day of usage, during otherwise unused hours (nights, weekends, etc.).

I'm happy to pay for the privilege and/or to barter books, consultations, Ethiopian artifacts, whatever. "

How long does it take for those of you that work for someone else to take up this simple task. If it was that easy then why has Bill Huffman not done it yet?

Bill, I'm still waiting for your answer from you that your personnel at your company will allow you to give access to John or allow you to use the Monster subscription to give John the information that he needs..not a big deal.

Tom, Bill could as you mentioned, tell his company that John would like to buy time as a contractor/consultant.

And Dave the issue is simple, my reactions are to see who will go the mile and deliver to John.

Do any of you think when John made his request, that he never thought about the dialogue we would get into, or the fact that he may already have access through other means (outside of the money) with his FBI pals or some other institution such as the university?

I'm really having fun with this thread, never laughed so much since Lawrie Miller warmed up Gavin Kennedy.

J.R(ic)